Senator Graham, the First Amendment isn’t just a good idea. It’s the law and one of the most sacred Constitutional rights. You know, that old parchment that you took an oath to uphold?
[Update Wednesday evening]
Roger Kimball points out a woman who tells Senator Graham what he is, and to stop defending Sharia law. Read and watch the whole thing.
[Bumped]
I honestly didn’t understand half of what he was saying. It didn’t sound like he even understood what he was saying, it was that convoluted, contradictory, and nonsensical.
And, in this case, it didn’t seem like typical political double-speak and waffling, it really came across as complete numbskullery, as you so aptly described it…
This unthinking McCain butt buddy can’t ‘retire’ from the senate fast enough for me
Epic smackdown by Ann Barnhardt, my new serious crush.
This guy is brainless!
OK, I get that the First Amendment allows us to burn the sacred book of a group we don’t like or a religion of peace, that isn’t. I dare you to try that IN Utah with a Book of Mormon! And isn’t this Koran burning the international version of shouting “FIRE” in a crowded theater of war (while the “shouter” is safe at home) where Americans (and any westerners) could be harmed? (harmed hell, people were killed)
This to me was like handing children matches, dousing the room with gasoline, telling the kids NOT to light the matches and then you leave for a trip!!
Stoooopppiiidddd!!
IF Terry Jones is so brave and he’s so SURE he has God’s might with him, let him buy a ticket to Iraq or Afghanistan, go to the local ‘Koran’s r’ Us’ for a case of holy books, drop by and get a gallon of gas, head to some market square, and recreate, for them locally, his idiot act!!
He’d last 15 seconds!
Along with our rights, comes some foolish shit called responsibility! Terry Jones has run away from that aspect of this at a fast gallop.
What a jerk!!!
And just for the tally sheet, I’m PRO U.S. flag burning!! So long as you don’t try to use MY flag! It’s not as if I’m against the concept. Burn all the books you want, burn books about flags!! Burn eBibles, burn kindles, with Bibles running on them, wrapped in flags. But consider the consequences. Especially when dealing with people who think and act like it’s still 1311, or 1411, you need to take their education and sophistication level into consideration. Jones thinks he’s dealing with people from Tallahassee he just doesn’t know!
Loser!!
From a comment I saw at Belmont Club:
We know that burning Korans incites Muslims to violence, as does drawing cartoons of Muhammad.
So what about drawing cartoons of burning Korans?
OK, I get that the First Amendment allows us to burn the sacred book of a group we don’t like or a religion of peace, that isn’t. I dare you to try that IN Utah with a Book of Mormon!
What do you expect to happen if you light up a copy on Main Street in Salt Lake City? Riots? Assault? Gunfire?
I expect the very worst that would happen is you’d be issued a ticket for burning without a permit or causing a ruckus out of season.
I know plenty of Mormons. If you burned a copy of the BofM in the central square of SLC they may detain you for causing a disturbance (justifiable), then quietly drop you at a bus station with advice to leave town.
Very unlikely that you would be killed.
The Muslims have the notion that “offense” towards their faith justifies violence in response. Christians used to have the same notion but have mostly evolved away from it.
But Sen. Graham has a point. Given this known tendency within Islam, burning the Quran is an act guaranteed to get someone killed in the ensuing violence, somewhere. How is a person not responsible for this predictable effect of his act?
With freedom comes the responsibility to avoid doing actual harm to others. Freedom is not a license to do just any damned thing we please.
This isn’t an easy subject to sort out, is it?
Brian.
I worked in Utah for a while, off and on. There wouldn’t be a beheading, but there would be a serious ass kicking I think!!
I picked out Utah because I don’t know of any other area where there is that kind of concentration of religious singularity. I meant no disrespect to members of the LDS Church. Quite the contrary, I know few Christians who would stand up for the Bible that way. Most take a turn the other cheek attitude about everything.
Including defending their faith.
And with ALL I wrote, you only had a problem with, or a comment about, me thinking a Mormon would defend his holy book that way!?
I picked out Utah because I don’t know of any other area where there is that kind of concentration of religious singularity.
Any small town in Texas will have more Baptists than you can shake a stick at.
At the height of his dimentia, his predecessor for the seat, strom thurmond, was a better senator…. maybe he still is.
That said, we need to remember every stupid comment by graham on this issue has been. Matched and exceeded by harry reid. At least half the scorn heaped on the last rino should be directed at the second highest ranked democrat in washington
Reid is a mental case. Graham, on the other hand, should know better. That is what is so infuriating about his comments.
BTW, wouldn’t we ultimately be doing Islam a favor if we burned so many Koran’s that after a while the radicals just became insensitive to the whole thing? Of course, there probably aren’t enough trees to make that much paper.
The translation in Ann Barnhardt’s “Koran” is very different to that of the translations at asksam.
Ann Barnhardt even manages to turn marriage dowry into payment for prostitution, and Young men serving food and wine in Heaven into male sex slaves.
I can’t see anyone getting too excited about that “Koran” being burnt.
Given this known tendency within Islam, burning the Quran is an act guaranteed to get someone killed in the ensuing violence, somewhere. How is a person not responsible for this predictable effect of his act?
Gosh, good point. This is why every English-speaking person in the world over age 45 owns a copy of the January 1973 edition of National Lampoon.
Ann Barnhardt’s videos were amusing, though I can envision hordes of Muslims rampaging in response.
Where she lost me, though, was when she started claiming that Allah is Satan. Since I don’t believe in either Allah or Satan (or the divinity of Jesus, for that matter), this pretty much left me wondering if I could really recommend these videos to others.
The intent of the Koran burning was to incite violence by doing something profoundly offensive. If your neighbor found he could be so offensive to you and your family, perhaps by being so abusive towards your wife that you wanted you sock him one, but the police, because of the first amendment, decided they were powerless to stop him, and so he could keep on doing it, would you feel that free speech was being taken too far? That it was a case of the law looking after the offender?
Even though people have every right to burn the koran, I don’t support them doing it. I also don’t like piss christ like examples and flag burning from leftists but they have every right to be jerks.
It would be nice if we had leaders that would at least try to communicate to the Muslim world what freedom is like.
I do like making fun of our enemies but having sex with goats and pre-mature detonation videos are better routes to go.
Before anyone gets carried away and blames all of Islam, can I just mention that 99.9999% of Muslims kept their cool and didn’t riot and kill people in response to the Koran burning?
Why are the beautiful ones always insane?
I think American politicians need to stand up for free speech.
I note that at least some of the protesters in Afghanistan have said they were horrified by the killings; they came to protest, not to kill. They said they thought that the murders had been committed by Taliban militia members who had infiltrated the protests. (Even a peaceful protest in this case seems rather silly, but not a lot more silly than ranting on the internet.)
Also, no one here has condemned Hamid Karzai, but I think he deliberately and selfishly incited a protest to strengthen his political position by bringing attention to what some obscure goofball in Florida did. If he had to mention the incident at all, he could have talked about freedom of expression, but instead he went for divisiveness. Some ally.
Andrew, I think you made a great point (in another thread) about freedom of expression and public sex. I don’t want my daughter to see people having sex, but if the public sex is between consenting adults and they claim they are making a political point, I can’t convince myself that it shouldn’t be protected under “freedom of speech”, despite what the Supreme Court has said on the matter (“community standards”? Feh!) If you think public sex isn’t “speech” because it involves actions and not words, then the acts of Koran burning and flag burning and Piss Christ would also not be protected. I think Kevin is right that it isn’t such an easy problem to sort out.
That’s not surprising in the least.
Bob-1
I would have to say that I agree with you on your assessment of Karzai. I was thinking something very similar when I read the story. It may have been “irresponsible” to burn a Koran in Florida, but if not for Karzai publicizing it and characterizing it the way he did, I doubt anyone over in Afghanistan would have even noticed the video.
Titus, I find it surprising you don’t want to make a rational argument which explains why public sex between consenting adults to make a political point violates anyone’s rights and thus should be banned — like any offensive message, we can go somewhere else if we don’t want to experience it. I don’t want to advocate public sex but thinking about the issue might, as Andrew suggested, help free speech advocates think about why someone would want to protest (peacefully) and limit free speech.
Besides, public sex should be protected under another provision of the 1st amendment: the right of the people peaceably to assemble. 🙂
Charitable of you, but I’m simply lazy. In short, “free speech” does not mean “free venue” or “freedom to do whatever I want regardless of the immediate and obvious consequences .” Consider why it is that you need a permit to march on public streets or why in the State of California you cannot drink in a bar with fully-nude dancers. Also, when you say “(“community standards”? Feh!)”, you’re really saying (“property owners/renters”? Feh!)
Additionally, in the case that those who educated where so derelict as to ignore the most important philosopher in modern history, I’ll kindly point you to John Rawls and perhaps you’ll acquire a better understanding of the relationship between men and society.
“educated where” = “educated you were”
Sorry, it’s still early. :-/
Careful on that slippery slope Andrew. Bob, no one should have to make a rational argument. Anyone who would have public s3x as a political statement isn’t rational. It’s one thing to explain to 5y/o why someone is burning the flag. Explaining the other isn’t something a parent should be forced to do by simply walking down the street, for example. To limit free speech based on the violent tendencies of opponents enslaves us all. Also, to one of your other points, I’ll condemn Karzai.
How can by any stretch of the imagination can anyone claim that having sex in public is a “political statement”? Does one only have to claim that their actions are a political statement to make ANYTHING protected and permissible? Public defecation?
Where she lost me…
Beliefs differ, but her core argument regarding Graham was the same as I had when I first heard him. These are the guys that are supposed to be defending our constitution that can’t even get an argument right concerning aid and comfort to enemies.
Decent adults should consider the effect of words and actions so they do not offend, but the greater responsibility is not to be easily offended. It’s impossible not to offend someone, somehow.
What about offending an enemy? An enemy, by definition, has already done something to offend (something likely more serious than burning some book.) Are we giving aid and comfort to the enemy by our rules of engagement? I think she has a valid point.
It may just be that burning korans puts people in the right mindset for dealing properly with (that oh so small a percent of muslims that are) the enemy.
A nation of adults would first give consideration, then act with united decisive action. If only we could find a nation of adults… or at least, elect one or two adults to represent us.
Here’s one answer to how a sex act could have a political message, but I’m sure there are others — people are rather creative.
Fellatio (to pick one particular sex act) is illegal in quite a few states. When the participants are consenting adults, it is a victimless crime. A demonstration would vividly point out the lack of victimization. To be clear: I do not want to see this, I especially don’t want my daughter to see this. If the state didn’t legislate sex, there would be less of a case here.
Titus’ admirable concern for property owners and renters seems misplaced, as obscenity laws are just as in effect for public parks and on the lawn in front of the statehouse dome.
You don’t seem to grasp the complete meaning of all the words you use. (Hint: public != “yours for the taking”). Again, get back to us should you choose to educate yourself on social contract theory.
Titus, you’re not offering an argument that explains how you will avoid a tyranny and the end of free speech as we know it in the USA, all based on “community standards” and “social contracts”. You are one weird libertarian.
And here’s a really weird law (not for the squeamish, despite being a law)
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-361
Bob-1, there’s only so many pearls I will cast before thee: you side-stepped without addressing my counter-points. So in parting, allow me to horrify you with this thought — imagine the “tyranny and end of free speech” where the taxpayers and voters do not provie you with any public parks, period. Where would you have sex? Since you are only content to sponge resources from your fellow man to give you a venue — you wouldn’t be able to “speak” anywhere! Noooooooooo!
I agree we must be talking past each other, and your assumptions about me are laughable. I own a house and a business, I pay plenty of taxes, I do not participate in or advocate any lewd or illegal behavior, I’m deeply patriotic, and I’m older than you, so show some respect young man.
The mockery is compltely intentional. However, I only work with the material I’m given.
Earn it, old dog…
And it’s Titus for the win!
Not sure why bob-1 got onto public sex. Way to derail the discussion. Keep it on the appropriate thread.
Eric, it is a thought experiment, suggested by Andrew, for understanding the limits of freedom of expression. The idea is that public sex is an analogy for burning a Koran — public sex is an offensive act which runs against _our_ community standards. Senator Graham talks about flag burning and picketing soldier’s funerals as being examples of things that aren’t “speech” and shouldn’t be unrestricted. Since many here disagree with the Senator (Rand, for example, if I recall correctly, is no flag burner but is for the *right* to burn an American flag), I think it is helpful to consider other, even more potentially offensive acts to test whether our theories of _why_ Senator Graham is wrong hold water.
“The translation in Ann Barnhardt’s “Koran” is very different to that of the translations at asksam.”
And Allah knows you better get your Koran quotations correct or you just might incite another couple dozen killings.
If Ann Barnhardt (or her “Koran”) were to misrepresent a recent publication as offensively as she did, her ass would be in court for $$$
Thanks for giving me so much credit Bob, maybe we’ll just have to accept that the justice system is flawed, and that it has to be flawed, because even if everyone had the exact same moral code, written legislation inevitably has an arbitrary nature to make it practical.
Is anyone saying Senator Graham is wrong in any objective sense or are they just saying they don’t agree there’s an issue worth addressing?
The Senator would first need to make a coherent point. So far, we’ve established that he wants to “push back” a lot; after those weasel words, he gets foggier. Flag-burning and funeral-protesting (the latter of which should reserve one a seat in the Special Hell (normally given only to child molestors and people who talk in the theater)), while disgusting, should not warrant US Con amendments (c.f. “Prohibition”) i.a.w. federalism. Sadly, given the rag-tag shape The Law is currently in, I cannot give you a neat and clean answer — everything is duct tape + bailing wire at this point…
Titus, your tone irritated me so much I missed the point of what you were saying. Let me try again: you mentioned the need to get a permit to protest on the streets was to protect property owners and renters. I assumed that what you meant by that (and what you should have meant by that) was that businesses along the street might particularly suffer when protesters take over a street, possibly much more so than commuters. Permits are a good way to ensure that the streets are shared. Since I thought you meant it that way, I suggested public parks. Sadly you replied with nonsense about me not understanding that parks are paid for with taxes, instead of actually thinking about the situation from the perspective of property owners and renters .
Parks are shared, too. They’re primarily used as greenspaces by parents and children in urban areas that otherwise lack such. Since you’re a parent, I thought the objections to having sex in front of children would be obvious and require little clarification on my part.
“her ass would be in court for $$$”
Yea, imagine that, settling differences in a civil manner with respect to the rule of law; not some farcical “human rights” court or barbarous Sharia court either.
Plus, I am curious what, pray tell, do you consider a proper translation of the Koran? Because there are a few actual moderate Muslims are out there trying to raise red flags about the fanatical elements of their religion. They all seem to indicate it is a much bigger problem either you or Bob try to play it off as. For instance the documentary, Islam: What the West Needs to Know, has a number of Muslims explain that violence in Islam is inherent to the traditional interpretation of the Koran. In another documentary The Third Jihad, actually is narrated by a Muslim American an goes through several parts of the Koran.
I don’t know who ann is, she has a crazy in her eyes, but I don’t care.
As for burning the BofM in SLC, I think the response would be that there would be a lot of well dressed and polite young people reading you passages from it, and then trying to share one of them from their backpack filled with Books of Mormon.
Not sure why bob-1 got onto public sex. Way to derail the discussion. Keep it on the appropriate thread.
Wait, what? There’s a public sex thread?
Pictures or it didn’t happen.
Brian Dunbar,
in NC where I live it’s just like that too. But my gut tells me they’d be pissed off, maybe vocal, but that’s as far as it would go.
Douglas,
they might do that, but the older guys, IMHO, would be a lot more physical.
It’s just one man’s opinion about how I think people protect their own Holy Scripture.
I’ve got a question though, my brother told me this Terry Jones guy has some kind of connection to Anti-Gay Fred in Kansas. Anyone know if THAT’S true? I can’t find any ties.
Der Schtumpy, Jones’ Dove World Outreach Center has joined the Phelps Phamily Phreak Show on protests, and there were messages in support of the WBC on the Dove’s site, at least until it was pulled by the host.